Jpowers

Not the new Donald Trump Presidency thread

14,705 posts in this topic

5 minutes ago, T-Falcon said:

 

 When people seek ways to delegitimize an election by trying to manipulate around the Constitution they are going to meet resistance.

And it's not gonna work.  Only states that the Dems win anyways are changing the way come up with their EC votes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, T-Falcon said:

 

 When people seek ways to delegitimize an election by trying to manipulate around the Constitution they are going to meet resistance.

No one has suggested anything other than purely legal means to change the manner in which we elect a POTUS, Straw Mannerson.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Psychic Gibbon said:

You're right: Southern slave owners didn't, just as he said.

Madison. Was a filthy Federalists anyway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eatcorn said:

No one has suggested anything other than purely legal means to change the manner in which we elect a POTUS, Straw Mannerson.

 

 

Yes they have. It's literally a pact right now to undermine 2020 election

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Statick said:

No, actually ad hominem is more typically a right-wing tactic, along with:

1. Ad ignorantiam, which is to claim something is true because it cannot be proven false. (Birtherism)

2. Si Conclusion (Assuming the conclusion) - A subcategory of “begging the question," which is also a subcategory of circular reasoning. (You hear this all the time on Fox News when a host says something has been "well-reported on this and other networks," when it fact they are just quoting each other.)

3. TU QUOQUE - when those on the right attempts to appeal to their own hypocrisy by focusing on the acts of the people or person making the argument, as opposed to addressing the merits of the actual argument. (ie. Fishermen can’t protest offshore drilling because their fishing poles were “trucked to the store.”)

4. Remota Causa - (Avoiding the issue) - *see Ad hominem* - Never addresses the facts someone presents to them, but brings up the number of undocumented immigrants in the nation or the city of Chicago as a case in point for, whatever.

5. Argumentum Ad Populum - calling a person you disagree with names (*see adhominem) or by saying that person you disagree with is a bad person because of (*ie. communism). It cast judgment on the person's argument by casting judgment upon the person making the argument.

 

 

You're talking to the buffoon that ranted and raved about Obama being a communist purely based on a guilt by association fallacy. He simply doesn't understand basic logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, T-Falcon said:

Madison. Was a filthy Federalists anyway

:lol:

Madison was one of the authors of The Federalist Papers, yes.  

But he was opposed to Hamilton’s Federalist Party and helped form the opposition party with Jefferson.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Psychic Gibbon said:

I think we should take a moment to appreciate the fact that conservatives, saying we must avoid mob rule at all costs, keep threatening an armed revolt if they don't get what they want.

No one is threatening am armed revolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, T-Falcon said:

Yes they have. It's literally a pact right now to undermine 2020 election

They are so desperate they are going after votes from illegal aliens and 16 year olds to have a chance.  

(yes I know that 16 year old can't vote but Pelosi suggested lowering the voting age)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Psychic Gibbon said:

Ad hominem attacks against a Founding Father? Tsk, tsk.

I thought you Leftist hated our founding fathers and documents and Constitution and all that jazz. I figured you would appreciate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, T-Falcon said:

Yes they have. It's literally a pact right now to undermine 2020 election

What they are doing is legal and constitutional.  You literally just quoted the 10th amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, eatcorn said:

You're talking to the buffoon that ranted and raved about Obama being a communist purely based on a guilt by association fallacy. He simply doesn't understand basic logic.

I know, I know.

I figured some actual logic would pop his brainstem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, T-Falcon said:

I thought you Leftist hated our founding fathers and documents and Constitution 

Yeah, we know. You think a lot of dumb stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, T-Falcon said:

I thought you Leftist hated our founding fathers and documents and Constitution and all that jazz. I figured you would appreciate.

I was under the impression that the right were the true defenders of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers. Why is it that you guys never seem to know much about either?

Door Gunner and Statick like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe somebody could explain to me why a person who loses the popular vote is more legitimate as president than the person who won the popular vote?

Their arguments imply that the majority vote is an inherently less legitimate means of choosing a president than a system where the person not chosen by the public is the president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bristled at the suggestion of abolishing the EC at first, because I'm not a big fan of huge structural changes to how we allocate votes, but given how skewed the results have become, and the fact that we have the entire legislative branch based on proportional representation (which even THEN is skewed towards low population states), I think I'd be fine with it, provided it goes through the normal amendment process.

Door Gunner and Leon Troutsky like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Carl Showalter said:

First, I've been saying he's "not-too-bright" and the like, not that he's a "total dumb***."  To the extent I've said something like the latter before, I assure you it was hyperbole.

Second, it's not coincidence.  He picks fights in very public ways because that's what he's always done.  He's obsessive and impulsive, and craves attention and verification-of-his-genius above basically everything else..  And he fawns over dictators not as part of some scheme, but because he likes that they can do whatever the **** they want and sees himself similarly. 

And what I've just described also describes basically how he's always been and the people he's fawned over.  What you're describing would be completely out of character for him, as if at age 70 he just became this other person whose compulsive narcissistic rants for attention are something more than that, more than what they've always been.

Like I've said, the apparatus around him is basically exactly as you have described.  But there is little evidence that he has ever been capable of the kind of systemic, subtle, thoughtful actions that you're attributing to him, yet you seem to think everyone else has it wrong about him.  He's no more what you describe than he is what the right-ring describes (some crime fighting genius super man), he is exactly who he has always been.  Just now he's doing it from the White House.

He himself is constantly changing the "apparatus" around him, and what the **** would it matter if he's getting some ideas second-hand if he's using those ideas? You're talking like you have to preserve the idea that he's just a rich Fox News grandpa incapable of the kind of deception I've described, so the important thing here isn't that he used the liberal media and Russiagate to weaken enthusiasm for the Democrats in a way that'll be imperceptible to the left; the important thing is he didn't think of it himself.

Which I say is evidence of the success of his disinformation campaign; He could get so much of the left so invested in the belief that he's dumber than dog****, that even after the Mueller report came out, liberals refused to put 2+2 together, because that'd mean Trump played them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

I was under the impression that the right were the true defenders of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers. Why is it that you guys never seem to know much about either?

Ouch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now